Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2017 NFL Draft Prospects
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 98, 99, 100  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 10728
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rampantjet wrote:
Part of me feels like we are being to public with the whole Trubisky thing for it to be true. There have been rumors about us and Trubisky and us for a while now. This out of a team that runs a pretty tight ship. I wouldn't be surprised if we are looking to get a team behind us (Cleveland) to trade ahead of us in hopes that someone we covet drops to us.
The Hack love was like that last year though.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rich51


Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Posts: 2792
Location: WPB Fl via Jc NJ
PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Charles Harris redeemed himself at his pro day adding 5.5" to his vertical and 9" to his broad jumps. The difference is so big that I have to believe he had some medical issues at the combine

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/sec/university-of-missouri/article140463353.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rickyt31


Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 9822
Location: HEATlanta , GA
PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rich51 wrote:
Charles Harris redeemed himself at his pro day adding 5.5" to his vertical and 9" to his broad jumps. The difference is so big that I have to believe he had some medical issues at the combine

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/sec/university-of-missouri/article140463353.html


Yeah, I've noticed that too. If not, he need to release a training video.
_________________
JETS . HEAT . ATLANTA UNITED FC . UCLA/GEORGIA STATE .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jetsfandan423


Moderator
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 18181
Location: Greensboro, NC
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

barnaby8787 wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
Part of me feels like we are being to public with the whole Trubisky thing for it to be true. There have been rumors about us and Trubisky and us for a while now. This out of a team that runs a pretty tight ship. I wouldn't be surprised if we are looking to get a team behind us (Cleveland) to trade ahead of us in hopes that someone we covet drops to us.
The Hack love was like that last year though.




Did we really telegraph that though? I honestly don't remember anyone talking much about Hack other than jetskid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
jetskid007


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10872
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jetsfandan423 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
Part of me feels like we are being to public with the whole Trubisky thing for it to be true. There have been rumors about us and Trubisky and us for a while now. This out of a team that runs a pretty tight ship. I wouldn't be surprised if we are looking to get a team behind us (Cleveland) to trade ahead of us in hopes that someone we covet drops to us.
The Hack love was like that last year though.




Did we really telegraph that though? I honestly don't remember anyone talking much about Hack other than jetskid.


Correct and a lot of it was back channel stuff. This year feels a lot more manufactured, as it should be. If the Jets really don't have the intention to take a QB at 6 but teams think they will, it increases the likelihood that (a) a team tries to trade up ahead of the Jets to take a QB, leaving a better positional player on the board at 6; or (b) a team seeks to move up to 6
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 10728
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 11:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jetsfandan423 wrote:
barnaby8787 wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
Part of me feels like we are being to public with the whole Trubisky thing for it to be true. There have been rumors about us and Trubisky and us for a while now. This out of a team that runs a pretty tight ship. I wouldn't be surprised if we are looking to get a team behind us (Cleveland) to trade ahead of us in hopes that someone we covet drops to us.
The Hack love was like that last year though.




Did we really telegraph that though? I honestly don't remember anyone talking much about Hack other than jetskid.
Cimini had multiple articles about it prior to the draft.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rampantjet


Joined: 25 Apr 2012
Posts: 3745
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3829
PostPosted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

I think this only supports the idea that Macc is setting up a smoke screen. I think Macc wants one of the Safeties or Fournette. There can certainly be a situation we're all 3 are gone so convincing even 1 team that we are taking a QB would be huge. I think we will take a QB at some point but only if that player is BPA when we pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sapo28


Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 769
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rdelaney89 wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

I think this only supports the idea that Macc is setting up a smoke screen. I think Macc wants one of the Safeties or Fournette. There can certainly be a situation we're all 3 are gone so convincing even 1 team that we are taking a QB would be huge. I think we will take a QB at some point but only if that player is BPA when we pick.


When you're the Browns and you have as many assets as they do it would be foolish not to trade ahead to get "your guy". Helps the mind set of the prospect and fan base that their is a certain amount of faith in that prospect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rdelaney89


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 3829
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sapo28 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

I think this only supports the idea that Macc is setting up a smoke screen. I think Macc wants one of the Safeties or Fournette. There can certainly be a situation we're all 3 are gone so convincing even 1 team that we are taking a QB would be huge. I think we will take a QB at some point but only if that player is BPA when we pick.


When you're the Browns and you have as many assets as they do it would be foolish not to trade ahead to get "your guy". Helps the mind set of the prospect and fan base that their is a certain amount of faith in that prospect.

Yes I agree, they will trade ahead of us though to ensure they get the QB they want rather than waiting for us to be on the clock and hope we bluffed. If I'm Cleveland I'm taking a QB at 12 and hoarding the rest of my picks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobby816


Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Posts: 8894
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rdelaney89 wrote:
Sapo28 wrote:
rdelaney89 wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

I think this only supports the idea that Macc is setting up a smoke screen. I think Macc wants one of the Safeties or Fournette. There can certainly be a situation we're all 3 are gone so convincing even 1 team that we are taking a QB would be huge. I think we will take a QB at some point but only if that player is BPA when we pick.


When you're the Browns and you have as many assets as they do it would be foolish not to trade ahead to get "your guy". Helps the mind set of the prospect and fan base that their is a certain amount of faith in that prospect.

Yes I agree, they will trade ahead of us though to ensure they get the QB they want rather than waiting for us to be on the clock and hope we bluffed. If I'm Cleveland I'm taking a QB at 12 and hoarding the rest of my picks.

We won't know. They might view both Trubisky and Watson as great prospects and wait and see until 1 goes off the board and then make a move ahead of a team that might draft the other one. So they might not be wanting one ahead of us, but maybe look to move up between 7-11 for whatever one is still there. There could also be a free fall at qb bc it's a weak class. 1st might no come off until the browns pick at 12.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NJerseypaint


Joined: 04 Aug 2011
Posts: 1338
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

Yeah, I am convinced we are going to take Trubisky at #6. It's depressing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 10728
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NJerseypaint wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

Yeah, I am convinced we are going to take Trubisky at #6. It's depressing.
Same feeling here.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bianconero


Joined: 13 Jul 2013
Posts: 5518
Location: Polo Lounge
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NJerseypaint wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

Yeah, I am convinced we are going to take Trubisky at #6. It's depressing.
To say the least

If we draft Trubisky and then get the first overall pick again

Then we take another QB?

I guess one of them has to pan out, lol Confused
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
barnaby8787


Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 10728
Location: Manhattan, NY
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bianconero wrote:
NJerseypaint wrote:
rampantjet wrote:
The more time that goes by the less and less I want us to take a QB in the first 3 rounds of this draft. Leaving aside how poor this QB class is, we just don't have the surroundings to allow a rookie QB to succeed.

Yeah, I am convinced we are going to take Trubisky at #6. It's depressing.
To say the least

If we draft Trubisky and then get the first overall pick again

Then we take another QB?

I guess one of them has to pan out, lol Confused
Could you imagine Trubisky, Hack, and Darnold on the same roster Laughing
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Jets All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 98, 99, 100  Next
Page 99 of 100

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group